*** post for FREE via your newsreader at post.newsfeed.com ***

Jay Jones wrote:
> the same physics, yes-- and greater weight on a smaller
> cross-sectional area yeilds greater pressure, friction, and TRACTION.
> since a FWD car has its weight bias on the front (hence a natural
> tendency for understeer without other compensations), it has more
> weight on these steering and drive wheels to maintain more traction.
> RWD cars have a more equal weight distribution and, thus, less
> percentage of weight on BOTH the drive and steering wheels... if the
> cars are the same weight, and use the same size tires, the FWD will
> ALWAYS maintain better traction and controllability in inclimate
> weather as the greater pressure will yeild greater traction, reduced
> tendency for hydroplaning, etc...
>
> For example.... try driving a RWD car with very wide tires at high
> speeds in the rain-- it's unsafe at high speeds and subject to
> hydroplaning long before a FWD car with more narrow tires--- the same
> principle is involved.

So FWD cars have an advantage because of tire size and weight distribution?
I thought we were talking about the advantages of the *drive layouts*
themselves. You're creating what's called a "complex question" where
unrelated things are assumed to be inseperably related. Refuting your
complex question is easy. Just put narrow tires on the RWD car and give it
the same weight distribution as the FWD car. Done. Next, please.

- Greg Reed

--
1976 Cadillac Fleetwood 75 9-Pass sedan
(FS: http://www.dataspire.com/caddy)
1989 Audi 200 Turbo Quattro 5-Speed sedan
2000 Oldsmobile Intrigue
2001 Chevy Astro AWD (wife's)




-----= Posted via Newsfeed.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeed.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== 100,000 Groups! - 19 Servers! - Unlimited Download! =-----

 

*** post for FREE via your newsreader at post.newsfeed.com ***

Steve Grauman wrote:
>> Why does FWD have an advantage "only in bad weather"?
>
> Did anyone actually bother to read the three links I provided? Do a
> google search and see for yourself, the artciels are all very clear
> on the advantages and disadvantages of FWD. I'm not even asking you
> people to take my word for things, simply read over the expert
> sources I provided for you.
>
>> You complain about being tasked with backing things up, but
>> you've yet to back up this claim despite my repeated requests that
>> you do so.
>
> I provided THREE links with analysis of FWD Vs. RWD, did you read
> them? Everything I'm "claiming" was in black and white!
>
>> You choose instead to repeat the assertion with insults and
>> condescension.
>
> I'm constantly being attacked for my position even though I'm the
> only one here so far that's been able to site credible sources for my
> "claims". The rest of you seem to have the keen ability to ignore the
> source material I've provided as well as read only the parts of my
> posts you feel like reading so that you can make me seem a fool. I'm
> not sure how many of you went to college, but if you did you should
> remember the constant reminders from your professors that any and all
> claims need to be backed up, ideally with cited sources. I've done
> that, how come no one else seems to need to play by the rules?

I've moved this discussion to a new thread. It's been too far off topic for
way too long.

- Greg Reed

--
1976 Cadillac Fleetwood 75 9-Pass sedan
(FS: http://www.dataspire.com/caddy)
1989 Audi 200 Turbo Quattro 5-Speed sedan
2000 Oldsmobile Intrigue
2001 Chevy Astro AWD (wife's)




-----= Posted via Newsfeed.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeed.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== 100,000 Groups! - 19 Servers! - Unlimited Download! =-----

 

Steve Grauman wrote:
> Do you think I care what Europeans think? Do you think I care what *you* think?
> Do you know how to read other people's posts and comment on them in a relevant
> manner? Do you understand that I was not comparing Audi to Europe-only
> manufacturers? Are you awake and lucid? Get real man.

Are there other seriously taken car manufacturers then than Europeans in
this topic? You haven't said any, so we'll just stick to European cars
and European markets, since they know how to make cars here.

> It would have been a valid comparison if I was talking about cars sold only in
> Europe, which I wasn't doing in the post you responded to.

Yes, you were referring to some old Mustangs, which apparently are still
the only thing you remember. Don't you honestly think it's stupid to
compare any cars then, if we have to be picky on what they sell in the
mighty USA?

> Some of them are made in Europe (the Porsches) but other than the Peugeot, they
> are all sold in the U.S.

And Peugeot (or PSA) is a huge car company anyway, so even if it's not
sold in your mighty USA, it doesn't matter. It's not some small car
company you can just set aside, because you don't have the luxury to buy
a normal car.

> It's only a "bad" source because you disagree.

Naah, you should have more sources than just one. It's a bad source if
it's your only source, like in this case.

- Yak

 

As the tread gets worn, the tires PICK UP grip in dry
> conditions. That's why folks "shave" tires for racing.

Totally wrong! The surface in direct contact with the road might be slightly
bigger for a worn tyre, but the quality of rubber has so badly deteriorated
that grip is MUCH LESS, even in the dry. Otherwise, nobody would be
replacing their tyres and Michelin would be selling peanuts. Those who shave
tires for racing do it because they know or should know that in so doing
they are getting rid of that layer of rubber that has so badly deteriorated
("singed" as it were).

> Try a bigger rear anti-roll bar, or lower tire pressure in the rear.
> Works great. With the combo, you can tune it such that the car is
> neutral at the limit.

No. If you don't want to deviate too much from specs, I find that it is
precisely the opposite, i.e., rising pressure at the rear, that will help
the car oversteer - now, I have never tried anything drastic, so you might
be right, assuming it is by a considerable margin that you lower that
pressure, in which case, the car will be a real danger on the motorway as
the rubber will heat too much to be safely driven at high speeds.

> Goodness - sounds like you're going to have an accident some day. If
> you're still on the gas from turn-in to apex, then you weren't going
> fast enough BEFORE turn-in. Lifting at the apex and then grabbing
> loads of torque after that sounds like a good way to exit the roadway
> ***-first. Well, if the car is understeering at the limit, lifting is
> the only way to get the damn nose around...

The point in lifting and applying torque is precisely to get the back
started so that you can then modulate the amount of oversteer with your
right pedal.

> I am on the gas until some distance before the turn-in (differs with
> turn and road conditions), turn in and trail-brake (sometimes, if I am
> VERY familiar with the corner,) keep the throttle up over 3k rpm to
> keep the turbo spinning, select down to whatever gear is called for
> (depends on corner), off the brakes, late apex and full on the
> throttle. Trail-braking is tough, so I don't do it much unless there
> is good run-out from the corner in case I over-cook it. Otherwise, I
> have all my braking done before turn-in. Keeping the turbo up keeps
> me from getting a surprise on turn exit.

This techique is OK for a light FWD (anything like a Civic, Focus or 206
GTI, for example) but not for an Audi quattro for a very simple reason: If
you're totally off the gas until apex, you're too late on the pedal because
quattro will not have those necessary splits of a second to send torque to
the back, which is where you mostly want it at apex to induce oversteer.
Also, by using your hand-brake you're the one who is really risking having
an accident unless on a circuit, where speed-induced momentum is too high
for that sort of malabarism anyway.

> No, I have it set for slight oversteer, and I do not put myself in a
> position to have to emergency-brake in any corner.

Right, so you're a supernatural being because you never have to
emergency-brake. If you really know what "emergency" means, you'll know it
means everything but "predictable", so by no means can you foresee what your
"position" will be. Just think of an unexpected obstacle half-way through a
blind bend.

> I'm not exactly sure that you should be instructing others on
> cornering technique. Following your method might lead to a hell of a
> lot of surprises where none need to be, and on the track, it would be
> damn slow. But hey, what do I know? I've only had a few days of Skip
> Barber, so I'm no expert. Ask Krieger - he's a real instructor.

Did I ever intend to be instructing others? Not even close. I'm just only
talking about my experiences with my own quattro and trying to learn from
those with more experience than me, but then again, it's only a pitty we
cannot meet to see who is faster on the track, and learn from them, assuming
safety to be first and foremost.

 

> >All wrong again, the best handling FWD car on the market right now is the
> >Peugeot 206 GTI
>
> Jesus Christ, did you read my post? It said: "...as long as we're talking
about
> mainstream autos avaliable in North America." Peugeot no longer sells cars
in
> North America dimwit, try a reading comprehension course. Besides, the
Focus RS
> would trounce the Peugeot.

I don't care if you write an add-on to justify yourself and restrict the
market to the US. You know the world is much much bigger than just the US,
you dimwit
If the Focus RS would trounce the Peugeot it would only be because of its
turbo and power, not for its suspension. This is backed up by fiasco after
fiasco by the hand of Ford in the Wold Rallye Car Championship, and not just
for this year.

> I wouldn't know, I've never seen a comparison between them.

Then you don't even read as much as I believed you did, which was the only
thing that supported you as you don't seem to have any hands-on experience
from what I've seen in your posts.

> >VAG has NEVER held the best suspension. Indeed the best overall
suspension
> >belongs to Mercedes, and then after that, BMW suspension is also much
better

> That's an interesting theory, albeit completely wrong. The A4 and RS6
trounced
> the C32 and E55 in a recent comparison by Car and Driver, in terms of
overall
> dynamics and track-ability. BMW has a great suspension, but the S4 was
also
> better around a track in than the M3 in the same test.

Once again you're the one who not only cannot read between the lines, but no
even the lines themselves. I wrote OVERALL best. That means dynamics and
track-ability but most importantly COMFORT. The S4 might have been faster
than the M3 but it was only thanks to Quattro, not thanks to its suspension,
which is better for BMWs as they don't get the nasty bouncing of the front
axle we normal Audi drivers get - I am now excepting the RS6, which is of
course a totally different calliber.

> >Porsches
> >only excel on the Autobahn and wide open roads, drill this into your
mind,
> >right?

You should try to find the recent Top Gear DVD (produced by the BBC
> for UK television) where they praise the GT3 as being one of the best
driver's
> cars on earth.

"One of the best driver's cars on earth" has never been a synonym for
fastest on winding mountain passes, which was the point I made. "One of the
best driver's cars on earth" means one of those that can provide the most
SATISFACTION in the hands of EXPERIENCED drivers, which unfortunately
excludes you for obvious reasons. Then again, if I could only have one car
and had to use it also in the street I would hands-down take an RS6 over a
GT3, except for its resale value.

> >By the way, the GT3 could never cope with an M3 SMGII on a winding
mountain
> >pass, either, I feel sorry for you, since you seem to be so fond of
> >Porsches.
>
> I feel sorry for your ignorance. And I thought Europeans were soupposed to
be
> better educated than us Yanks...

But once again you've proven yourself wrong as my last quotation remains
true, so I'll try to be polite and keep what I think of you to myself...
You can never mean to start an argument between Europeans and Americans,
because deep at heart you know you probably came from Germany yourself - as
your last name Grauman suggests. Now, can you speak German, at least?

 

> The RSX was tested by C&D at 6.3 seconds, .02 faster than my GTi,

What GTI is it that you have? Is is supernatural, too?

 

you should remember the constant reminders from your professors that
> any and all claims need to be backed up, ideally with cited sources. I've
done
> that, how come no one else seems to need to play by the rules?

Because real-world experience is better than any of your sources and maybe
we've grown too old and lazy not to trust ourselves enough.

 

"JP Roberts" <1234@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<c0vt3i$lpd$1@news.ya.com>...
> As the tread gets worn, the tires PICK UP grip in dry
> > conditions. That's why folks "shave" tires for racing.
>
> Totally wrong!

[misinformation snipped]

Here's a good read for those confused by treadwear issues:

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tirete...n/shaving.html

This article does say that as tread gets old, it loses "stickiness."
But in auotcross circles, worn tires are used in place of racing tires
on the cars of the budget-minded.

In any case, car tires that have been *equally* heat cycled (which is
what we are talking about here), moving the less-treaded tires to the
end of the car that you desire to have *more grip* is the proper way.
I've done it, and it works.

>
> > Try a bigger rear anti-roll bar, or lower tire pressure in the rear.
> > Works great. With the combo, you can tune it such that the car is
> > neutral at the limit.
>
> No. If you don't want to deviate too much from specs, I find that it is
> precisely the opposite, i.e., rising pressure at the rear, that will help
> the car oversteer - now, I have never tried anything drastic, so you might
> be right, assuming it is by a considerable margin that you lower that
> pressure, in which case, the car will be a real danger on the motorway as
> the rubber will heat too much to be safely driven at high speeds.

Oh, dear - you are terrribly confused. Here is a URL to help ease
your lack of knowledge:

http://www.mazda323performance.com/suspensiontech.htm

Go to the chart at the bottom.

> > Goodness - sounds like you're going to have an accident some day. If
> > you're still on the gas from turn-in to apex, then you weren't going
> > fast enough BEFORE turn-in. Lifting at the apex and then grabbing
> > loads of torque after that sounds like a good way to exit the roadway
> > ***-first. Well, if the car is understeering at the limit, lifting is
> > the only way to get the damn nose around...
>
> The point in lifting and applying torque is precisely to get the back
> started so that you can then modulate the amount of oversteer with your
> right pedal.

Not the way you describe it. Maybe you've left something out?

> > I am on the gas until some distance before the turn-in (differs with
> > turn and road conditions), turn in and trail-brake (sometimes, if I am
> > VERY familiar with the corner,) keep the throttle up over 3k rpm to
> > keep the turbo spinning, select down to whatever gear is called for
> > (depends on corner), off the brakes, late apex and full on the
> > throttle. Trail-braking is tough, so I don't do it much unless there
> > is good run-out from the corner in case I over-cook it. Otherwise, I
> > have all my braking done before turn-in. Keeping the turbo up keeps
> > me from getting a surprise on turn exit.
>
> This techique is OK for a light FWD (anything like a Civic, Focus or 206
> GTI, for example) but not for an Audi quattro for a very simple reason: If
> you're totally off the gas until apex, you're too late on the pedal because
> quattro will not have those necessary splits of a second to send torque to
> the back, which is where you mostly want it at apex to induce oversteer.

I can see you have no experience on the track, or that your experience
is quite small or elementary. That's OK, we all started there. I
don't want oversteer at the apex - I want straight-on power. I want
to steer as little as possible - I'm trying to extend the straight. I
want the car to be neutral to the turn exit. You want to steer A LOT
before the apex, then steer less after. And you do not want to slide
any of the tires in any way. Really - don't take my word for it.
Look up "trail braking" and "late apex" in Google - that will explain
it better than I can.

> Also, by using your hand-brake you're the one who is really risking having
> an accident unless on a circuit, where speed-induced momentum is too high
> for that sort of malabarism anyway.

I'm not sure where you got the idea I used my handbrake at all. Maybe
you should read what I wrote more carefully.

> > No, I have it set for slight oversteer, and I do not put myself in a
> > position to have to emergency-brake in any corner.
>
> Right, so you're a supernatural being because you never have to
> emergency-brake.

I have not had to emergency brake in quite some time. In fact, I
cannot actually remember the last time. That is because, on the
public roads at least, I never, *ever* outdrive my sightlines. This
is a basic defensive driving technique, taught to me when I first got
behind the wheel of a motor vehicle. Nothing supernatural about it.
Common sense, that's all.

> If you really know what "emergency" means, you'll know it
> means everything but "predictable", so by no means can you foresee what your
> "position" will be. Just think of an unexpected obstacle half-way through a
> blind bend.

If it's blind, then I go only as fast as I am able to see. If that
means 20mph around a corner, then that's what I drive. I don't
overdrive my sightlines.

> > I'm not exactly sure that you should be instructing others on
> > cornering technique. Following your method might lead to a hell of a
> > lot of surprises where none need to be, and on the track, it would be
> > damn slow. But hey, what do I know? I've only had a few days of Skip
> > Barber, so I'm no expert. Ask Krieger - he's a real instructor.
>
> Did I ever intend to be instructing others? Not even close.

That is wise. I'm not sure where you got your instruction, but that
instructor is not fit to teach even basic elementary vehicle driving.

> I'm just only
> talking about my experiences with my own quattro and trying to learn from
> those with more experience than me, but then again, it's only a pitty we
> cannot meet to see who is faster on the track, and learn from them, assuming
> safety to be first and foremost.

If you drive as you say, then I would be able to take any old A1 VW
GTI in decent tune and do a decent job of making your day a poor one.
When I went to a club event some years ago, one of the fellows who had
a 308 Ferarri decided to run his everyday work car. A 1983 VW GTI.
He said it had not been modified in any way, other than uprated
dampers and strut tower braces. His times on the track (Portland
International Raceway) were better than almost all of the fine iron
driven by the invited club members. A lot of expensive European
machinery, some of it with TRIPLE his HP numbers, were humbled that
day. But he did have his SCCA license, and he did know how to drive
that car at 10/10ths. I had sold my GTI long before then, but he made
me wish I still had it. I had no idea it was that fast! He was so
smooth it was incredible.

My point? The machinery is important, but the technique is more
important. Maybe you have just been unclear as to your skills and
understanding of automotive dynamics. I will certainly be happy to
give you the benefit of the doubt. But please, read the references I
gave, and look up the terms I have used. It will make my point more
clear, in the case that I have written it poorly, and caused
misunderstanding. If I have written as to cause misunderstanding, I
apologize in advance.

Regards,

R.F. Jones

 

>I don't care if you write an add-on to justify yourself and restrict the
>market to the US

You don't need to care, you simply need to read the posts and keep your
comments relevant. I've not even attempted to argue the Audi Vs. Peugeot case
with you. I've simply said that your comment was irrelevant.

>You know the world is much much bigger than just the US,

Of course it is, and when/if we have a discussion about FWD autos offered
worldwide, than I'll be happy to hear what you have to say about the Peugeot.
Seeing as they were pulled from the American market long before I was old
enough to drive, I have no experience with them first hand - and I admit it.

>If the Focus RS would trounce the Peugeot it would only be because of its
>turbo and power, not for its suspension

The Focus has one of the best suspensions worldwide, at least in comparison to
other FWD cars. There's a reason VW looked to the Focus for clues about how to
properly setup the Golf V's suspension.

> This is backed up by fiasco after
>fiasco by the hand of Ford in the Wold Rallye Car Championship

I won't argue this. But if a manufacturers performance in Rally racing was the
only indication of how well their street cars perform, the Mitsubishi Eclipse
GTS would walk all over the Peugeot.

>you don't seem to have any hands-on experience
>from what I've seen in your posts.

I've driven several Porsches and Audis at the limit. I'm the first to admit I'm
not an expert driver, but I don't think it matters here. The bottom line here
is I'm really only arguing over one specific claim:
That the Peugeot and a Honda Prelude SH could match or best a Carrera on a
"winding" road if the drivers were equally matched. The only "proof" you guys
have been able to provide for those claims are antecdotes, reference to
Peugeot's rallye wins (and I pointed out that Porsche and Audi have race
records that far superceed Peugeot's), and your silly questioniong of my
experience.

>I wrote OVERALL best. That means dynamics and
>track-ability but most importantly COMFORT.

Fine. I've driven a few BMWs and I can tell you that in EVERY case the
compareable Audi was more comfortable.

>which is better for BMWs as they don't get the nasty bouncing of the front
>axle we normal Audi drivers get

My father's Audi never suffered that. Nor do the A4 and S4 of some friends.

>has never been a synonym for
>fastest on winding mountain passes

Other than reference that quote and link you to the C&D article with the 1.03g
skidpad number, I'm not sure how else I can express in factual terms (as
opposed to my personal opinion) the capabilities of the GT3. If you wish to
believe that Peugeot builds a superior car, than fine. I still challenge you to
take your claims to the Porsche NG and see what response you get from them.
It's all to easy for you here when I'm by myself.

>EXPERIENCED drivers, which unfortunately
>excludes you for obvious reasons.

What obvious reasons would those be? I've had more wheel time in more cars than
a number of older "adults".

>Then again, if I could only have one car
>and had to use it also in the street I would hands-down take an RS6 over a
>GT3, except for its resale value.

I'd be tempted to make the same choice, but primarily because I think the RS6
retains much more "streetability" than the obviously track-bred GT3. Although
this is exactly the same reasoning why I would choose the standard M3 and F360
over their "stripped down" lightweight counterparts for day to day use.

>You can never mean to start an argument between Europeans and Americans,

I wouldn't dare, I actually envy a lot of the advantages Europeans have over us
Americans, like better public education and health care systems.

>because deep at heart you know you probably came from Germany yourself - as
>your last name Grauman suggests.

100% German-Austrian

>Now, can you speak German, at least?

Yes, but not very well. My great grandparents were fluent, but my grandfathers
(both WWII vets) wouldn't allow the speaking of German in their homes after
their parents passed on.

 

>Are there other seriously taken car manufacturers then than Europeans in
>this topic? You haven't said any, so we'll just stick to European cars
>and European markets, since they know how to make cars here.

Someone commented that Audi had the best suspension. I said I'd agree *as long
as we were only talking about models sold in North America*. When you bring
cars that aren't sold here into the discussion, then it all changes. That's
all.